Fear for Indian dominance is history: Samy

Update: 5:10PM FIJIS fear of being dominated by Indians should be a thing of the past, said head of the Technical and Secretariat Support team John Samy.

He said some leaders behaved as if Indians would dominate Fiji when the truth was that indigenous Fijians were part of the majority make up.

People have often accepted governments that have been nothing but a national embarrassment in the way they have discharged their sacred responsibilities, he said.

Mr Samy said one way of arresting the cycle of coups is to moderate the rise in religious fundamentalism.

He said another way is to ensure the armys concerns about governance are addressed and resolved within the established governance framework, he said.

*************************

This guy really think we’re idiots or little kids. The indian minority dominate 99% of commerce and now trying to take out existing institutions that protect our indigenous rights, to further weaken our control over our country.

Whenever we want to defend our rights or implement affirmative action to try and balance the Indian dominance in the commercial sector, it is branded as being racists but read the comments above again. Isn’t Samy playing the race cards here???

What courses religious fundamentalism Samy? Its lack of opportunity and poverty which radicalises views and make the poor turn towards who they perceive to have caused them to be poor.

What has caused the rised of poverty and choked opportunity out of our youths of today Samy? Baini’s coup and Chaudary’s economic policies post 12/06 when he became Illegal Minister of Finance.

The Army’s concern about governance Samy? Some body shove a copy of the 2005 Auditor General’s report of the Military down his throat please!!!

The legal and elected SDL-led Coalition Govt introduced policies to assist indigenous Fijians who swelled the ranks of Fiji’s disadvantaged and underprivileged.

Prisons, school drop-outs, the unemployed, squatters, beggars, the illiterate, and those below the poverty line were predominately indigenous Fijians.

SDL sought to introduce economic policies to encourage the taukei into commerce, self-sufficiency, further education, and to be more industrious contributors to society.

By teaching indigenous Fijians ways to lift themselves out of poverty, SDL sought to create an ‘economic tide to float all boats’. The whole of society would have benefited.

But Chodo can’t have the Fijians succeeding. Oh no. He needs to dominate us, economically, politically, and finally.

Guess what, Chodothru$h?
Your plan will fail.
Because your only weapon of rule is fear.
And it cannot work forever.

Your puppet John Sami is accusing the Fijians of ‘fear of Indian dominance’.
You have obviously realised that the Indo-fijians no longer respond to your calls for them to fear the Fijians.
So you are trying to divide the people by suggesting that Fijians actually fear our Indian brothers and sisters.

Well, we don’t. We live side by side with them, as we always have. We eat with them. We talanoa with them. We drink grog with them. We eat curry with them. Some of us even marry them and have mixed blood children together, like Lavenia Paradath, Imrana Jalal, and many, many others.

Like a biblical deceiver, you sow the seeds of discord, warping it to your own ends. You do all you can to divide us, make us fear each other. It doesn’t work. We are onto you.

WHAT THE CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Na levu ni lamushona nei CHodo he has to resort to this! Ae dua mada e one-sidetaka na tamata qo..really!!! vaka sa da loose patience mai na mataqali ka vaqo…I don\’t know Mr. Sikivou personnaly and how long he has been in the finance dept (or if he is even legal, as in he was there pre-coup) but really this is why WE cannot take all this lying down anymore. Geeeeeeezzzzzzzzzz louise!!!

Suspension

AMELIA VUNILEBA
Wednesday, May 21, 2008

FINANCE Ministry deputy secretary Peni Sikivou has been suspended by the Public Service Commission over public comments he made on the M Krishnamurthi land use report, says Public Service Commission chairman Rishi Ram.

\”Yes he (Sikivou) has been suspended for a few weeks now,\” said Mr Ram.

He confirmed Mr Sikivou\’s suspension was linked to public comments he had made against his line minister, Mahendra Chaudhry.

Under the Public Service Act 1999, the public service code of conduct states that, \”an employee must maintain appropriate confidentiality about dealings that the employee has with any minister or any member of the staff of a minister\”.

Earlier, this year, Mr Sikivou had said he was only forwarding orders from his minister when he signed a cover letter attached to the M Krishnamurthi report sent to the Native Land Trust Board.

\”He is suspended until disciplinary proceedings are instituted against him,\” said Mr Ram.

\”The charges to be served are being finalised but he will have the opportunity to respond before the commission.\” Mr Ram said the commission had been told last week that charges were being prepared.

He said the process would take four to six weeks.

He said when a civil servant was suspended, the onus was on the particular officer to apply to the commission for salary payment to continue.

Mr Ram said the officer would submit the hardships he-she would face if he-she did not receive any pay and the Commission could decide on what quantum to be paid during the suspension period.

But, he said, this did not exceed 50 per cent of the civil servant\’s salary.

Mr Sikivou could not be reached for comment yesterday.

Finance Ministry permanent secretary Peceli Vocea, who is in Tonga, referred all queries to the commission.

Mr Chaudhry could not be reached for a comment.

Mr Sikivou had said in February that he was prepared to face the consequences of his actions after the M Krishnamurthi report recommending the de-reservation of native land sparked heated debate.

Mr Sikivou had said he was only doing his job when he was given the project proposal on the de-reservation of native land from his minister in January.

He said a note from Mr Chaudhry was attached to the proposal for him to send the proposal to the NLTB for further action.

Mr Sikivou said he was concerned about some recommendations in the proposal, especially the de-reservation of native reserves.

The problem here is that Sikivou’s bossman, Vocea is bending down to Maiya Chodo when he was instructed by this tax evader to report the matter to the PSC. These greasers are the problem. Vocea could have verbally warned Sikivou and end the matter there because it was a non-issue really! Instead he gave his backside to Maiya Chodo.

Just shows the evil that this man Chodo has weaved throughout the interim Goverment.

I thought Samy is an expat homeless no-sapo consultant.
Why is this fatherless refugee commenting on Fiji?
Wasn’t he supposed to “listen to the People of Fiji”?
He should shut up and listen, not to his own verbal diorrhea.

After they shove a copy of the 2005 A-G’s report down Samy’s throat, they should shove a copy of the same report up Qarase’s you know what – and then go back and shove a copy of a report of every prior year up the Fijian administration – because these bugger have been robbing the people of Fiji blind since independence.

The author wrote – “Its lack of opportunity and poverty which radicalises views and make the poor turn towards who they perceive to have caused them to be poor.”

It is the Fijian administration and the Fijian chiefs who have caused the Fijians to remain poor.

The lack of opportunity and poverty among the Fijians – the cause of that is your successive Fijians administrations that have failed the Fijians miserably and who have been ripping off the Fijians – the Indians ain’t the reason why the Fijians are poor.

Below are some facts and questions as may help you differentiate between perception and realty.

Go find out why in the 1970s it was the Alliance party politicians who had millions of dollars in loans that were written off by Qarase – that money was earmarked for benefit the Fijian people. You SV guys have contact out there in the civil service – so why don’t you have one of your buddies go dig up stuff at the Registrar of Companies office and look at all the mortgagee sales and loans written, and guess what, after those loans were written off – they got millions more. BTW – These same bastards were behind the 1987 coup. While they sunk millions – the poor common Fijian got a couple of thousand dollar loan and being in business for the first time – with little support from the government, of course he also went under.

Some Indians also made the money – look at Punja, they really hit big in the 80 – you wanna go find out who gave all the concessions, subsidies and market protection that helped these Indian business grow – It was your Fijian administration – don’t blame the Indians..

Those iTaukei entrepreneurs – you know why they never made it – remember EIMCOL –why did it go under in less than two years. Because your Fijian administration rather than helping the iTaukei entrepreneurs, Qarase and the rest gave bigger FDB loans to the big supermarkets – to wholesale to the Fijians and later screw them with competitive pricing.

You know why the Fijians are not into farming – because Fijian administration plundered funds earmarked for the Fijians. The sugarcane land developed in Segaga was supposed to go to the Fijians – what happened was the Alliance ministers had transferred that land to their wives names and to their relatives. You remember how in the 2000 coup, they burned down the cane farm belonging to Mara in Segaga – go figure out who the Fijian chief was behind that fire and why the Mara boys are still fighting with that chief. BTW – how come Rabuka has such a big farm. Then there was the 25 million Agriculture scam under Qarase – quess who would have received that 25 million dollars it that money was not scammed – remember how just before the election they were distributing stuff in Rotuma from this agriculture money. How much of that money do you think was earmarked for the Indian? You talk about the auditor-General report – did you ever figure out why Ratu Mara refused to account for the $200K check made out to him that has supposed to benefit the copra farmers in that area – go check out the auditor-general’s report for that time. How about the $120 million CDF fund under Minister of Ag Militone Leweniqila – that money was to have gone to farmers other than sugar cane farmers – guess who would those farmers be. BTW – check out the Auditor-General’s report for that year – and the new Pajero for the Minister and the Toyota Landcruiser for the assistant minister.

Go find out who bought the Class A shares in the FHL – and then they wrote of $20 million, and then go find out any of these buggers bought Eimcol shares.

You guys should go find out from your yasana about where the money is going and what happens to your community village projects.

Why don’t the Fijians in the village get a reply from the administration and have to make rounds to the Roko Tui’s office. Those villages do not have good sanitation, roads that don’t even go the villages, rural education sucks, infant mortality rate is unacceptable. Do you think the FHL directors get the same run around – of course not, they have money to spend on FHL. Where is all the lease money and royalties going.

After the 1987 coup and between 2000 and this coup – there was no economic progress in the villages, Fijians are actually worse off now then they were before the coups. People who the Fijians depended on to uplift their livelihood – they have failed miserably and idiots like you still go around blaming the Indian.

So now do you get it – who the real enemy is – and why the Fijians are poor.

Multi-ethnic states tend to become arrayed as competing groups battling over scarce resources, and it is rare for different ethnic groups to have the same size and control of resources at any given time.

Although there is a correlation between group size and economic and political power, there are glaring exceptions to the rule, the most common being exploitation of larger groups by smaller groups with greater access to the forces of social control.

Certain groups, such as Jewish groups and overseas Chinese living in Southeast Asia, have often been exceptions to the general pattern, at times showing disparities between economic and political power, and often obtaining high levels of economic or political power despite a small group size.

Ethnic conflict is largely conceptualized as a matter of cynical politicians “mobilizing fear and greed for personal advantage” (p. 74). For example, the ethnic cleansing that has occurred in Eastern Europe “is perhaps more a tool for political mobilization, a means whereby certain leaders create and re-create their justification for holding power, than a program with a predictable or intended outcome” (p. 75), although, again, no evidence is adduced to back up such claims. At the same time the authors quote a UN report indicating that the purpose of ethnic cleansing is “to instill terror in a civilian population, in order to cause them to flee and never return” (p. 78) — a rather clear rationale obviously in the perceived ethnic interests of the group doing the cleansing.

While ethnic cleansing is rejected in the strongest moral terms, the authors give their moral approval to competition by birth rate — a view shared also by the current governments of the United States and other NATO countries. Writing prior to the NATO military action in Kosovo, the Teitelbaum and Winters state that the very large numbers of Albanians in the province were due to a conscious program of demographic competition which by 1996 had resulted in four out of five births in Kosovo being Albanians (p. 96).

Nowhere is the reality of ethnic conflicts of interest more apparent than in the Middle East, the topic of Gad Gilbar’s Population Dilemmas in the Middle East. Rates of natural increase for the Muslim Arab population in Israel exceeded the rates of surrounding Arab societies, particularly during the 1960s. Palestinian population trends became a volatile issue within Israel with the publication of a government report that the Arab population was projected to increase to 21.5% of the population and that the Palestinians would constitute 50% of the total population of Israel and the occupied territories by 2015. This resulted in great consternation within Israel, with one faction concluding that the Palestinians in the occupied territories should be given autonomy, while others proposed a form of ethnic cleansing in which the Palestinians would be relocated outside the occupied territories.

. Group size is important because size translates into greater political power within a multi-ethnic state, and group size can give legitimacy to demands for political autonomy and ultimately the creation of secessionist ethno-states. Greater group size also facilitates resource competition within multi-ethnic states, at least partly because of increased ability to manipulate the political process. Multi-ethnic states tend to become arrayed as competing groups battling over scarce resources, and it is rare for different ethnic groups to have the same size and control of resources at any given time.

Although there is a correlation between group size and economic and political power, there are glaring exceptions to the rule, the most common being exploitation of larger groups by smaller groups with greater access to the forces of social control. Certain groups, such as Jewish groups and overseas Chinese living in Southeast Asia, have often been exceptions to the general pattern, at times showing disparities between economic and political power, and often obtaining high levels of economic or political power despite a small group size.

Modernization brings with it increased ethnic conflict as different groups begin competing in larger economic and political systems in which, at any given point in time, groups differ in their numbers and their control of resources. People are forced into new social relationships, and “the most logical place to begin to look for such relationships is to identify oneself as a member of a larger something, based upon those attributes that one carries around with oneself, namely one’s language, historical place, race, religion” (p. 31). This tendency may be exacerbated by elites who utilize these tendencies to satisfy their own individual interests which may or may not coincide with the interests of the group as a whole. The remainder of the book describes the means by which ethnic groups have pursued their interests. Separate chapters are devoted to the following strategies: manipulating the census, engaging in pro-natalist policies, assimilation, population transfers, boundary changes, and economic pressures.

Ethnic wrangling over the census has become a chronic political issue in the United States coinciding with increasing ethnic fragmentation, but these battles pale in comparison with those found elsewhere. Minorities in many parts of the world typically worry about being undercounted by majority-run government agencies in an effort to minimize their importance. Majorities sometimes attempt to define minorities out of existence by refusing to recognize them as a category, as in Turkey where the government refuses to acknowledge the existence of Kurds as a group . Minority groups are sometimes distinguished in order to minimize the importance of any one group, as in the Ottoman Empire where the government distinguished among a variety of Muslim groups and classified them as non-Muslim “in order to promote the preferred group to numerical majority” (p. 57) and thus legitimize its political hegemony. Censuses also provide information on which groups are growing more rapidly, and this can be political dynamite. For example, in Lebanon the politically and numerically dominant Maronite Christian group ceased to be a majority because of the higher rate of increase of the Muslims. The Muslims claimed that Christian numbers had been inflated and demanded a new census. The manipulation of the census was a cause of the civil war that eventually engulfed the country.

Ethnic cleansing has been much in the news of late, but Bookman notes that ethnic cleansing “has been in operation across the globe since time immemorial” (p. 129). She provides a great many examples where groups have been forced to migrate. This phenomenon has been common throughout the 20th century, but it has increased in the 1990s, so that by 1992 there were over 20 million refugees from internal conflicts. At times this goes hand in hand with military conquest, as in the policy of settlement of occupied territory on the West Bank, the Golan Heights and the Gaza strip in Israel after the 1967 war or the dilution of Western Poland by Germans after conquest by the Nazis during World War II. In other cases, a target population is expelled. Bookman mentions a variety of expulsions from around the world, including the expulsion of Jews from a number of European societies beginning in the Middle Ages and the many expulsions that have occurred in the recent history of the Balkans. Bookman points out that the Croats, the Serbs, and the Muslims have all engaged in ethnic cleansing. “The Yugoslav war is a dirty civil war, in which neighbor has turned against neighbor, and each group is trying to be the first to cleanse undesirables lest they cleanse him instead” (p. 131).

Bookman and Gilbar show clearly that competition between ethnic groups is real and that the success or failure of the group has vital real-world implications for the individuals that comprise these groups. To take a rather obvious example, the fact that the Serbians lost the war in Kosovo is having a dramatic impact on the fortunes of both the Kosovar Albanians and the Kosovar Serbs. This should be obvious but the point bears documenting because there continues to be strong current among a great many Western intellectuals denying the reality of ethnicity or supposing, as Teitelbaum and Winters would have it, that ethnic interests are simply delusions imposed by exploitative ethnic leaders.

Sad to hear Macuata has been the first province to accept GCC changes. It was yet for another opportunist reason of course. They said that it would benefit the province with all the promises of development laced in the proposals. Its a kind of selfish and shortsighted mentality. They should think in the long term and be in unison with other provinces who rejected the changes for valid reasons notwithstanding it may benefit them by govt’s conditional assistance if they accepted. Macuata has marked itself as a rebel oportunist and this stigma will remain after the new govt comes into power soon and thats when they will be taken to task for having taken a different direction in this unfortunate decision.

The reason why there is problem in the country is because the Fijians are still struggling to come up in life. By contradicting himself John Sa Mi said the Fijains should not be afraid of the Indians. Whilst he is trying to espouse a non-racial Fiji yet he makes racial utterances. Imagine if Fijians are reasonably uplifted in life there would be less of the problems we face today such as crime, hatred, unemployment, school dropouts, violence etc including the coup. There is no mention of helping the struggling Fijians in the charter farter in what is clearly obvious. Address this first then it will take care of everything else.

Budhau the dickhead keeps on going back to the 1970s, he was not there from 2000-2006 to see the changes happening with government affirmative actions where Fijians now almost out number all other races in teh law society or the Fijian boy from a village in Tailevu South who topped the marks in the Form Seven exam in 2003, got a 100% pass in accounting and is now a chartered accountant in one of the top firms in Suva. These are just two example of SDL policies working.

As for Macuata Province, all I can say is we must think beyond provincialism and think of the Taukei Nation as a whole. As the old saying goes, “United We Stand Divided we Fall”.

SV, from a very reliable source !! this morning there is a presentation on national issues by some senior civil servants to a group of Indian Naval Squadron !!!!! NOW THAT SHOULD CAUSE SOME CONCERN !!! CHODO’S STRATEGIC PLAN THAT WAS CIRCULATED PREVIOUSLY IS NOW COMING INTO ACTION !!!!! SOMEONE SHOULD JUST KILL THIS BASTARD !!!!

Anyhoo.. In regards to Macuata, not all the districts agreed. That was why you have Udu, Labasa and the Tui Macuata. The bigger districts like Namuka, Dogotuki etc., did not agree with the new look GCC. Just because three people agreed and their Vanua agreed does not mean the whole of Macuata agreed too. The thing is these people will only speak for themselves and for the benefit of their own land while the rest of the districts will be left out in the dark.

Johnny Boci Smelly Samboy is obviously living in some nonexistent fantasy land.

“Although there is a correlation between group size and economic and political power, there are glaring exceptions to the rule, the most common being *****exploitation of larger groups by smaller groups***** with greater access to the forces of social control.”

Ars-brained John Samy; betrayor of Ratu Mara & the Alliance, worked with Chodo behind the scenes while he was a civil servant to draw up a blacklist of Fijians to be removed from top positins in the civil service in 1987. Caught and took the late flight out to Aotearoa only to resurface after Baini had swallowed Chodo’s prick-head, balls and stinker! Yep, talk Fijian and its about race, nation building and the charter will only favor the rich like this useless, fuckall, thieving $14,500 a month wannabe consultant!

We have co-existed with Indians for ages. We have become friends and family. It is really sad that Fiji politics tends to destroy that special relationship we have fostered over the years.But on the same note I would like to remind all of us that our forefathers “allowed” the Indians to stay in Fiji. Offered land for them to cultivate and live their lives. BUT !!!!!!! Remember the land that you stand on belongs to the indegenous Fijian through and through. We indegenous Fijians need to also look at things from a spiritual perspective and try and work things out so we can live peacefully. The dominant effecet here is the land we stand on. As much as I love my Indian friends, I will also say that I will defend my Land till death. So let us sit down and work at peace.